The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-02-15
TAKEN TOAHIGHER COURT
THE CANNON-DU BOSE ELLETT
CASE.
The Sheriff Fined $50 aud Given a
Term In Jail-He Appeals to the
Supreme Court.

COuluR U6lOT6 IL WAS tu6 NduuOu-
DuBose-Elie,t tquabble, wherein the
Sheriff was in a middle as to which of
two masters he had best serve. A
brief synopsis OF the case is as fol-
lows:
On the 18th of January Judge Du-
Bose ordered Sheriff Cannon to clear
out bag and bsggsge of the County
Court and turn over the rooms occu-
pied by that body TO the Criminal
Court. Chairman Slaughter Became
incensed at the summary ejectment
and applied to Chancellor Elicit for an
Injunction restraining Sheriff Cannon
from serving the process. This was
granted. Judge DuBose thereupon
appointed balliff to execute the Or
der, and the mandatory portion OF the
Chancellof's order, r. quiring the Sher-
i'll to replace the furniture, etc, al
ready removed, bsing dissolved, the
Criminal Court Judge had the quar-
ters cleared and took possession.
When Sheriff Cannon brought the
ChancellnT's Injunction 10 the knowl-
edge OF Judge DuB1se, and asked for
instructions, that official said: "Ooey
my instruction..
But suppose, Your Honor, the
Chancellor SEES fit to put me in il
for conlempt?" ventured tie Sheriff.
"I'll ge, you out-get you ont in a
minute, 8 r." remarked the Judge.
1t was deemed advisable, ho gever,
10 have the work Of removal completed
by some persou not under the il juno.
ton, and Sheriff Cannon WAS relieved
of the somewhat hazardous task.
When the matter come up before
the County Court yes'erdsy morning
Sheriff Cam m, through his attorneys,
Messrs. L. Il f. Lehman aud Turley q
Wright, submitted the folio wing de-
tense:
SHELBY County QUARTERLY CoURr,
JANUARY TERN, 1887.
In Res. Oft the seizure of the county court
rooms ana offices of the Chairman Of said
coort by W. d. Cannon, Sheriff of Snelby
county:
Said W. d. Cannon, Sheriff as afore-
said for answer to the rule served on
him in this matter, says:
Upon the rec ipt OF the order from
the Criminal Court Judge, issued to
him on the 18th day Of Jauusry, and
upon the advice of his attorney, the
Sheriff proceeded to take possession OF
the rooms described in said order.
He acted only in the regular discharge
of his duties as Sheriff of Shelby
county, and began to remove the
desks and furniture therefrom, and to
prepare the same for the occupation
of the Criminal Court, as said older
directed. While he was thus engaged
in obeyiug said order, but before he
had removed all the furniture, an in
junction was served on him from the
Charcsry Court, commanding him to
desist and refrain from executing said
order from The Criminal Court, and re-
curing him to restore Chairman
Slaughter and the County Court to
the full possession and enjoyment OF
said rooms aud furniture in the same
condition al before any part thereof
Was removed. Defendant referred to
the cause OF d. c. Slaughter, chair.
man, vs. W. D. Cannon, Sheriff, No,
84O3 of the Rule Docket of the
Ohancery Court, under which the in.
junction was granted, for full parIicu-
lars.
On the morning Of January IA, the
Chancellor, OF his own motion, en-
tered an order in said cause, revokiDg
and setting aside as much OF said in
junction as dire cted said defendant to
restore Chairman Slaughter and the
County Court to the possession and
eui lyment OF the rooms ana to re-
place the furniture. Immediately
upon the service of said Injunction, on
the Is b of January, defendant de-
sisted and refraiEed from any further
OK acution of the order OF the Criminal
Court. He imm. distely closed and
locked the doors of the County Court
rooms, and did 81 in good faith and
uron the advice Of his counsel, on the
idea that said injunction, as far az the
same was mandatory, would not be en-
forced. This proved correct, as the
order Of the Chancellor the flowing
morning, verified.
Defendant recited that he has never
done thing or taken strp in the
premises since raid Injunction IVES
served on him. On the contrary, he
has yielded i'm plicit obedience to the
commands of the Injunction, as
modified. He denied that he
delivered said courtroom and a
part of said furniture to the Judge OF
the Criminal Court, or permitted said
Judge TO take posi- ession OF them.
Defendant is informed that on or
about January 18th, the balance of
the furniture and contents Of the
County Courtroom were removed
thereirom, and that the fur
niture and outfit of the room
Heretofore occupied by the Criminal
Court were then moved into the room
heretofore occupied by ths County
Court. Since that time the sessions OF
said Criminal Court have been held
in ssid room. Defendant states that
he had no sort CT connection with the
removal of any of the furniture
and contents, or any part thereof, from
said room, tubsfqut mt to the service OF
said Injunction on him. Neither did
he have any connection with the
moving OF the furn ture and outfit
If the Criminal Courtroom into the
OOunJV OUuIlIOOlu' liz avoid bbhb
he did not in any manner or to any
extent counsel, advise or participate
in the removal of anything from said
County Courtroom, or the moving of
anything i1to the same subsf quent to
the injunction. He AYERS tnat all
action IN the premises subsequent to
the Injunction wa taken under the
orders OF the Criminal Court Judge,
by bailiffs or persons for that purpose
selected or appointed by said Judge.
Said bailiffs or persons 80 selected or
appointed had no eort Of connection
with respondent, and were not. at
Tackled to his Office. Respondent
luther states that sad County Court
room vas entered during his absencs
and without bis knowledge or consent,
nd the Criminal Court put in posses
sion OF the same, as stated above.
Respondent further states that all
his actions in the premises wers in
the regular discharge Of his duties ss
Ser q, under orders from the Crimi
nal Court Judge, and that in point oil
fact he never had any interest in the
u'e and possession of said courtroom
and he did 20 under imperative orders
| & -, A. no,,., TrI.o